i love the pic of them crowded around her bed, and praying, with the minister laying his hands on her head to "DRIVE THE SATAN'S DEMON OF CANCER" out. Sighs, ya, that will do it..thanks. Let the poor girl die with a shred of dignity.

It is likely enough that lions and scorpionsGuard the end; life never was bonded to be endurable nor theact of dyingUnpainful; the brain burning too oftenEarns, though it held itself detached from the object, often aburnt age.No matter, I shall not shorten it by hand.Incapable of body or unmoved of brain is no evil, one alwayswent envyingThe quietness of stones. But if the striped blossomInsanity spread lewd splendors and lightning terrors at the endof the forest;Or intolerable pain work its known miracle,Exile the monarch soul, set a sick monkey in the office . . .remember meEntire and balanced when I was younger,And could lift stones, and comprehend in the praises the crueltiesof life.

It says in the article the seizure that paralyzed her only happened last month, so understandably her parents haven't come to terms with the idea of "This won't get better"

Frankly, I think the woman in question should give it some more serious thought. Yeah, it's a horrible situation,and complete physical restriction, but she is at least able to communicate. Does she really want to die?

^ Somehow I missed the part where she is terminally ill. That's a bit of a different ball of wax. Tell her to wait a few days and really think it over, if she is still adamant, take out the tubes. Living in a condition needing a breathing tube AND terminally ill means it is not suicide to remove the tube.

octopied:Tell her to wait a few days and really think it over, if she is still adamant, take out the tubes.

Erm, she's had that tumor for a whole year and has been paralyzed for a month. Also "Speaking on behalf of Ms Lee, Dr Dana Lustbader testified that the patient 'consistently asks that her breathing tube be removed.'" (FTFA).

I'd say she's already had enough day to think it over, wouldn't you agree?

So let me see if I understand this... If a doctor opposes euthanasia because of a deeply held philosophical belief (do no harm), he's making a logical, rational argument. If a Christian opposes euthanasia because of a deeply held religious belief (sanctity of life), he's a crazy inbred derpbeast?

For the record, my grandfather was in just such a situation about a year ago. Even though he had a living will stating that he didn't want any kind of life support when his time came, the doctors refused to move him to a hospice because they couldn't provide the same level of oxygen that the hospital did. The family argued for a while about whether or not the breathing tube counted as life support, but he settled the argument by dying that very day.

Bhruic:EmmaLou: What selfish parents. I know it must be hard to see her like that, but imagine being her and having to have such stress and drama at the end of your life :( is this really how these people want to end the time they have with her...a court battle?

It's not selfish. It's stupid, but it's not selfish. They legitimately believe that if they let her get the tube removed, she'll burn in hell. Now I personally think that's idiotic, but if you believe it to be true, then preventing her from doing it would be the correct thing to do.

No, it's stupid, not legitimate. I am honestly certain that someone who beats them until they give in will keep THEM from going to hell.

There is nowhere in the Bible that you have an obligation to torture someone to keep them alive, even if that person is yourself.

So let me see if I understand this... If a doctor opposes euthanasia because of a deeply held philosophical belief (do no harm), he's making a logical, rational argument. If a Christian opposes euthanasia because of a deeply held religious belief (sanctity of life), he's a crazy inbred derpbeast?

For the record, my grandfather was in just such a situation about a year ago. Even though he had a living will stating that he didn't want any kind of life support when his time came, the doctors refused to move him to a hospice because they couldn't provide the same level of oxygen that the hospital did. The family argued for a while about whether or not the breathing tube counted as life support, but he settled the argument by dying that very day.

Shows how much of a true christian you are... a REAL christian wouldn't take a loved one to the devil's alter and have satan's priests treat him for cancer... they would turn to JAAAAYSUS and pray the cancer away...

It is the internet. Anti-thiests (mostly Christian hating psuedo-intellectuals) are like starving hyenas waiting for a story like this so they can run in cackling and gnashing teeth. But welcome to the internet anyway!

kicksmile:SpacemanSpoof: Wow, the anti-Christians are out in force today.

It is the internet. Anti-thiests (mostly Christian hating psuedo-intellectuals) are like starving hyenas waiting for a story like this so they can run in cackling and gnashing teeth. But welcome to the internet anyway!

Oh, I'm no newbie... I was going toe-to-toe with anti-theists online when Fark was just a big-nutted squirrel. Of course, those were the more civilized days when people actually debated rather than just spewing hate at each other. (lawn, off, etc.) :)

It just seems that the hate is particularly strong with this thread for some reason, that's all.

kicksmile:SpacemanSpoof: Wow, the anti-Christians are out in force today.

It is the internet. Anti-thiests (mostly Christian hating psuedo-intellectuals) are like starving hyenas waiting for a story like this so they can run in cackling and gnashing teeth. But welcome to the internet anyway!

These people are torturing their daughter because they believe that magic is real ... and we are the bad guys?!?

Fark you and your magic bullshiat ... this person is suffering and begging to have the man-made intervention stopped. This has nothing to do with magic or god or any other imaginary crap.

SpacemanSpoof:kicksmile: SpacemanSpoof: Wow, the anti-Christians are out in force today.

It is the internet. Anti-thiests (mostly Christian hating psuedo-intellectuals) are like starving hyenas waiting for a story like this so they can run in cackling and gnashing teeth. But welcome to the internet anyway!

Oh, I'm no newbie... I was going toe-to-toe with anti-theists online when Fark was just a big-nutted squirrel. Of course, those were the more civilized days when people actually debated rather than just spewing hate at each other. (lawn, off, etc.) :)

It just seems that the hate is particularly strong with this thread for some reason, that's all.

What I don't understand is why the wishes of an adult are being trumped by other adults.

Parents or not, she is way past 18 and should be able to decide her own fate.

When you are admitted into the hospital with a potentially life threatening pathology, ask to speak to a social worker, clergy person of your choice, or hell, even your doctor. Tell them flat out the extent of life prolonging measures you would be OK with. If this is not something you are familiar with, ask a nurse or a physician about end of life treatment. It is your right as a patient, and while you may not get answers immediately, you should get them in a timely manner.Verbally, or in writing if you have the capacity, give your advanced care directive to your physician in the presence of a family member, nurse, resident (whatever, just a witness).Take a lesson from all this coverage of such incidents and do yourself a favour: draft an advanced care directive. Encourage your family to do the same. Discuss your decision with your family, and tell them in no uncertain term what your directive stipulates.As a physician, I've had 'the talk' with several families of varying beliefs, and it inevitably comes down to 'What would the patient want?'. Your beliefs as a relative be damned (sorry), but my prima facie duty is to the patient, and any medical professional worth his or her salt will abide by the patient's directive either personally or through referral. I will do my best to counsel their loved ones, and clarify the situation to the best of my ability and their understanding, but I will not renege on my duty to my patients.

So let me see if I understand this... If a doctor opposes euthanasia because of a deeply held philosophical belief (do no harm), he's making a logical, rational argument. If a Christian opposes euthanasia because of a deeply held religious belief (sanctity of life), he's a crazy inbred derpbeast?

For the record, my grandfather was in just such a situation about a year ago. Even though he had a living will stating that he didn't want any kind of life support when his time came, the doctors refused to move him to a hospice because they couldn't provide the same level of oxygen that the hospital did. The family argued for a while about whether or not the breathing tube counted as life support, but he settled the argument by dying that very day.

My step-mother was in a similar situation about a 2 years ago now. Her lungs were so scarred that there was not way for her to beath without being induced into a coma and kept on a breathing machine. There is no cure for the scarring that ARDS did to her lungs.

But the doctor kept stringing my dad along for about 7 weeks or so saying that "you never know, miracles happen".

Bullshiat. The only miracle that can happen now is if my dad wins the lottery to pay off 7 weeks of ICU care.

As far as do now harm. Which is more harmful? Keeping a person alive against their wishes as they lie in pain and agony with no hope of recover, or letting them die peacefully?

So let me see if I understand this... If a doctor opposes euthanasia because of a deeply held philosophical belief (do no harm), he's making a logical, rational argument. If a Christian opposes euthanasia because of a deeply held religious belief (sanctity of life), he's a crazy inbred derpbeast?

For the record, my grandfather was in just such a situation about a year ago. Even though he had a living will stating that he didn't want any kind of life support when his time came, the doctors refused to move him to a hospice because they couldn't provide the same level of oxygen that the hospital did. The family argued for a while about whether or not the breathing tube counted as life support, but he settled the argument by dying that very day.

My step-mother was in a similar situation about a 2 years ago now. Her lungs were so scarred that there was not way for her to beath without being induced into a coma and kept on a breathing machine. There is no cure for the scarring that ARDS did to her lungs.

But the doctor kept stringing my dad along for about 7 weeks or so saying that "you never know, miracles happen".

Bullshiat. The only miracle that can happen now is if my dad wins the lottery to pay off 7 weeks of ICU care.

As far as do now harm. Which is more harmful? Keeping a person alive against their wishes as they lie in pain and agony with no hope of recover, or letting them die peacefully?

Nothing is more terrifying to folks than going to that glorious and beautiful great reward of perfection they pray and sing about every Sunday.

I'm not a parent, but I can imagine that Mrs. Lee is probably so distraught due to her daughters condition and imminent death that she *wants* to believe that things can somehow turn around. Can't say I can really blame her or judge her either way for that

sseye:No, it's stupid, not legitimate. I am honestly certain that someone who beats them until they give in will keep THEM from going to hell.

There is nowhere in the Bible that you have an obligation to torture someone to keep them alive, even if that person is yourself.

These people are sick, selfish, and evil.

There are plenty of things not in the bible that some Christians believe. Hell, the Catholic church has reams of stuff not in there. Among the things not in there that they believe is the suicide thing. Now you might not agree with that interpretation. You might not agree that what would be happening here is suicide. But if they believe it - which they do - then their belief is that they are saving her soul. What we think of what they are doing is irrelevant to their beliefs. So you might be able to claim sick and evil, but they aren't being selfish.

kicksmile:SpacemanSpoof: Wow, the anti-Christians are out in force today.

It is the internet. Anti-thiests (mostly Christian hating psuedo-intellectuals) are like starving hyenas waiting for a story like this so they can run in cackling and gnashing teeth. But welcome to the internet anyway!

SpacemanSpoof:So let me see if I understand this... If a doctor opposes euthanasia because of a deeply held philosophical belief (do no harm), he's making a logical, rational argument. If a Christian opposes euthanasia because of a deeply held religious belief (sanctity of life), he's a crazy inbred derpbeast?

This is the most personal freedom of all. All other freedoms come from the personal freedom of controlling one's own life and body. Having someone else interject their principles or beliefs in a way that takes that freedom away should only be done when absolutely necessary, with as minimal intrusion as possible, and with oversight and transparency of the person who is exerting control.

If you oppose euthanasia on the basis of your philosophy, then fine. If you oppose euthanasia on the basis of your religion, good for you. If you take control of my body in order to impose your convictions or beliefs on me, then you're a no good son of a biatch, no matter how "moral" or "correct" those beliefs are.

Bhruic:So you might be able to claim sick and evil, but they aren't being selfish.

Yes they are.

It is the victim's choice as to what religious beliefs she is going to follow and she either doesn't believe in magic or she doesn't believe that stopping man-made intervention is suicide. Either way the parents are selfishly overriding her choice!

phyrkrakr:SpacemanSpoof: So let me see if I understand this... If a doctor opposes euthanasia because of a deeply held philosophical belief (do no harm), he's making a logical, rational argument. If a Christian opposes euthanasia because of a deeply held religious belief (sanctity of life), he's a crazy inbred derpbeast?

This is the most personal freedom of all. All other freedoms come from the personal freedom of controlling one's own life and body. Having someone else interject their principles or beliefs in a way that takes that freedom away should only be done when absolutely necessary, with as minimal intrusion as possible, and with oversight and transparency of the person who is exerting control.

If you oppose euthanasia on the basis of your philosophy, then fine. If you oppose euthanasia on the basis of your religion, good for you. If you take control of my body in order to impose your convictions or beliefs on me, then you're a no good son of a biatch, no matter how "moral" or "correct" those beliefs are.

Ah, my point exactly. My grandfather made his wishes very clear, and it was obvious to anyone with a brain that he wasn't going to get better. But still, except for a few family members, everyone involved tried to hang on as long as possible in complete defiance of his instructions, for whatever reasons they could contrive. In the end, does it really matter what each person's rationalization was?

So let me see if I understand this... If a doctor opposes euthanasia because of a deeply held philosophical belief (do no harm), he's making a logical, rational argument. If a Christian opposes euthanasia because of a deeply held religious belief (sanctity of life), he's a crazy inbred derpbeast?

For the record, my grandfather was in just such a situation about a year ago. Even though he had a living will stating that he didn't want any kind of life support when his time came, the doctors refused to move him to a hospice because they couldn't provide the same level of oxygen that the hospital did. The family argued for a while about whether or not the breathing tube counted as life support, but he settled the argument by dying that very day.

My step-mother was in a similar situation about a 2 years ago now. Her lungs were so scarred that there was not way for her to beath without being induced into a coma and kept on a breathing machine. There is no cure for the scarring that ARDS did to her lungs.

But the doctor kept stringing my dad along for about 7 weeks or so saying that "you never know, miracles happen".

Bullshiat. The only miracle that can happen now is if my dad wins the lottery to pay off 7 weeks of ICU care.

As far as do now harm. Which is more harmful? Keeping a person alive against their wishes as they lie in pain and agony with no hope of recover, or letting them die peacefully?

I think you hit the nail on the head. They have to pay for the machine that goes "BING".

Sadly, I can picture my girlfriend's parents doing this. They're deeply evangelical-Christian. Fortunately, she, as a product of that Ebil Secular Hoomanist Edumacation, has dumped the religion of her childhood.

I need to point her at this story as a prompt for her to get a living will drawn up, in case she ends up in the unfortunate circumstance the woman in TFA is in. She doesn't talk to her parents much any more but if push came to shove they're her next of kin and are legally the people who would be making decisions regarding her health care if she were unable to make her wishes known. I'm pretty certain she's miles apart from them on this, like she is on most controversial issues involving morality or ethics.

I think you hit the nail on the head. They have to pay for the machine that goes "BING".

You know, a small, jaded part of me thinks that way, but the really, that can't be the case. My step mom worked for a doctor that was associated with the hospital and the ICU doc and the ENT she worked for knew each other very well. They simply can't make money from people that don't have it, no matter how much debt they leverage against an estate that has nothing.

I think this doc did really want to help, but in combination with my Dad's denial of the situation and any glimmer of hope, it kept going on for far to long IMO.

So let me see if I understand this... If a doctor opposes euthanasia because of a deeply held philosophical belief (do no harm), he's making a logical, rational argument. If a Christian opposes euthanasia because of a deeply held religious belief (sanctity of life), he's a crazy inbred derpbeast?

For the record, my grandfather was in just such a situation about a year ago. Even though he had a living will stating that he didn't want any kind of life support when his time came, the doctors refused to move him to a hospice because they couldn't provide the same level of oxygen that the hospital did. The family argued for a while about whether or not the breathing tube counted as life support, but he settled the argument by dying that very day.

My step-mother was in a similar situation about a 2 years ago now. Her lungs were so scarred that there was not way for her to beath without being induced into a coma and kept on a breathing machine. There is no cure for the scarring that ARDS did to her lungs.

But the doctor kept stringing my dad along for about 7 weeks or so saying that "you never know, miracles happen".

Bullshiat. The only miracle that can happen now is if my dad wins the lottery to pay off 7 weeks of ICU care.

As far as do now harm. Which is more harmful? Keeping a person alive against their wishes as they lie in pain and agony with no hope of recover, or letting them die peacefully?

I think you hit the nail on the head. They have to pay for the machine that goes "BING".

As a nurse who spent many years working ICU, let me tell you how absolutely farking stupid you are. The goal of the ICU is to stabilize critically ill people, it is not to pay for machines that go "bing". If people don't meet the criteria, they are sent to other floors/units. There is not a practicing nurse or doctor who would let a terminal patient lie there and suffer to make money. Only a really sick fark would even conceive of something that evil. We know when it's time to let go, you farking imbeciles who are too afraid of offending god or great aunt margaret are what continues their suffering, not us. You farking lackwit.

So let me see if I understand this... If a doctor opposes euthanasia because of a deeply held philosophical belief (do no harm), he's making a logical, rational argument. If a Christian opposes euthanasia because of a deeply held religious belief (sanctity of life), he's a crazy inbred derpbeast?

For the record, my grandfather was in just such a situation about a year ago. Even though he had a living will stating that he didn't want any kind of life support when his time came, the doctors refused to move him to a hospice because they couldn't provide the same level of oxygen that the hospital did. The family argued for a while about whether or not the breathing tube counted as life support, but he settled the argument by dying that very day.

My step-mother was in a similar situation about a 2 years ago now. Her lungs were so scarred that there was not way for her to beath without being induced into a coma and kept on a breathing machine. There is no cure for the scarring that ARDS did to her lungs.

But the doctor kept stringing my dad along for about 7 weeks or so saying that "you never know, miracles happen".

Bullshiat. The only miracle that can happen now is if my dad wins the lottery to pay off 7 weeks of ICU care.

As far as do now harm. Which is more harmful? Keeping a person alive against their wishes as they lie in pain and agony with no hope of recover, or letting them die peacefully?

I think you hit the nail on the head. They have to pay for the machine that goes "BING".

As a nurse who spent many years working ICU, let me tell you how absolutely farking stupid you are. The goal of the ICU is to stabilize critically ill people, it is not to pay for machines that go "bing". If people don't meet the criteria, they are sent to other floors/units. There is not a practicing nurse or doctor who would let a terminal patient lie there and suffer to make money. Only a really sick fark would even conceive o ...

I sure hope this doesn't group me in with the "lackwits" - but there are many doctors and nurses out there that will keep the machines on to make money. There are many doctors out there that will prescribe drugs to people who don't need them. There are nurses out there that kill their patients on purpose. There are pharmacists that cut drugs in half (to save money) knowing full well the patient will die. There are doctors and nurses that have sex with their comatose patients. Do you not read the news outsdie of Fark? As much as you think we live in a perfect world, we don't. Doctors and nurses are people and people can be assholes.

So let me see if I understand this... If a doctor opposes euthanasia because of a deeply held philosophical belief (do no harm), he's making a logical, rational argument. If a Christian opposes euthanasia because of a deeply held religious belief (sanctity of life), he's a crazy inbred derpbeast?

For the record, my grandfather was in just such a situation about a year ago. Even though he had a living will stating that he didn't want any kind of life support when his time came, the doctors refused to move him to a hospice because they couldn't provide the same level of oxygen that the hospital did. The family argued for a while about whether or not the breathing tube counted as life support, but he settled the argument by dying that very day.

My step-mother was in a similar situation about a 2 years ago now. Her lungs were so scarred that there was not way for her to beath without being induced into a coma and kept on a breathing machine. There is no cure for the scarring that ARDS did to her lungs.

But the doctor kept stringing my dad along for about 7 weeks or so saying that "you never know, miracles happen".

Bullshiat. The only miracle that can happen now is if my dad wins the lottery to pay off 7 weeks of ICU care.

As far as do now harm. Which is more harmful? Keeping a person alive against their wishes as they lie in pain and agony with no hope of recover, or letting them die peacefully?

I think you hit the nail on the head. They have to pay for the machine that goes "BING".

As a nurse who spent many years working ICU, let me tell you how absolutely farking stupid you are. The goal of the ICU is to stabilize critically ill people, it is not to pay for machines that go "bing". If people don't meet the criteria, they are sent to other floors/units. There is not a practicing nurse or doctor who would let a terminal patient lie there and suffer to make money. Only a really sick fark would even conceive o ...

Good God woman, you're going to have an aneurysm. Yes, it sucks that health care providers are portrayed as bad guys, but come on, if I got used to it within a year, surely someone of your experience can shake it off.

I mean, the guy feels put out, but probably also realizes that is expertise over pathology and disease process does not match the doctor's. He also probably recognizes that he's missing something, or is the victim of miscommunication, but he needs to assign blame to feel better. So, let him (or her) assign it where he or she sees fit. His vitriol isn't going to affect any health care professional, however, your particular brand of condescension will just play into his or her perception of persecution.

Oh, and in case, I wasn't clear, You Are All Sheep, your cynicism has given way to a persecution complex. A nonsensical one at that. Spaceman Spoof, I truly am sorry for your loss, and it sucks that you feel you were led on, but I think you need to acknowledge that deeper understanding of disease process and intervention is a more likely explanation to the doctor's course of action than malice. We aren't all bastards. As a matter of fact, the majority of us give two shiats about our patients and their well being. Sometimes, we can't communicate the rationale behind our decisions because of the complexity of the situation...and while platitudes like 'miracles can happen' don't help, please understand that sometimes the situation is probably beyond your understanding. I don't know the particulars of your relatives case, but I really do hope and think that there is something more to the situation.

Farking Canuck:kicksmile: SpacemanSpoof: Wow, the anti-Christians are out in force today.

It is the internet. Anti-thiests (mostly Christian hating psuedo-intellectuals) are like starving hyenas waiting for a story like this so they can run in cackling and gnashing teeth. But welcome to the internet anyway!

These people are torturing their daughter because they believe that magic is real ... and we are the bad guys?!?

Fark you and your magic bullshiat ... this person is suffering and begging to have the man-made intervention stopped. This has nothing to do with magic or god or any other imaginary crap.

She has rights and these selfish, stupid people are denying them.

You are everything that is wrong with anti-theists. And thank you for confirming my post.

The daughter is an adult. She told the doctors what she wanted. End of story.

I saw no mention of them having protective custody, power of attorney, or having filed a restraining order, etc. Perhaps the article left it out but once you are adult they don't have any more legal standing to make decisions for her than I do.

And I'd pull the plug on her if that was her wish. And I'd expect any Farker to do the same for me.

WhoGAS:I had to help kill my dad this year (on my birthday) and then a few months later, on my vacation, I had to help my mom and family decide to let my grandmother go as well. While that was going on, my aunt died alone because we were all at the other hospital.

I believe that a person should have the right to decide when and how they die. What I've seen this year is deplorable behavior by medical "professionals" who care only for the bottom line. This woman's decision should be respected.